meat = shorter life

If the OP is referring to the China Project....try again. The actual data suggest that PLANT proteins correlated higher with cancer than did animal
protein and that wheat consumption was the best predictor of heart disease and myocardial infarction. And let's not forget...it's Epidemiology, it
doesn't prove anything.

The China Study....is a book. A book that should be burned. The author, T. Colin Campbell, is a fraud and a liar.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

That is all.

P.S.: Cooked meat has NEVER been proven to cause cancer. Jesus Christ, where do you guys get this stuff?

Good point about cooked meat and cancer. However, cooking the meat does increase carcinogens that are linked to cancer. I firmly don't believe cooked
meat causes cancer directly but it may help to some extent due to the carcinogens. Thanks for your input though, I wouldn't even want to glance at the
China study because my brother read it and told me about it... But he eats meat now thanks to me.

AS i said u can get all the amino acids from plants I already stated that you need to combine different plant foods to get all the amino acids. To say
you need to eat meat to get those is plainly wrong as well as your suggestion regarding phytoestrogens

Evidence is accruing that phytoestrogens may have protective action against diverse health disorders, such as prostate, breast, bowel, and other
cancers, cardiovascular disease, brain function disorders and osteoporosis, though there is no evidence to support their use in alleviating the
symptoms of menopause. Phytoestrogens cannot be considered as nutrients, given that the lack of these in diet does not produce any characteristic
deficiency syndrome, nor do they participate in any essential biological function

Males The use of phytoestrogens (as soy protein) in fast food meals and other processed foods as a low-cost substitute for meat products may lead to
excessive consumption of isoflavonoids by fast food eaters. A research team at the Queen's University in Belfast, in a review article, speculate that
such intake may lead to a slight decrease in male fertility, including a decrease in reproductive capability if isoflavones are taken in excess during
childhood. In theory, exposure to high levels of phytoestrogens in males could alter their hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis. However, studies have
shown that such a hormonal effect is minor. Isoflavones supplementation has no effect on sperm concentration, count or motility, and show no changes
in testicular or ejaculate volume.

One, it would be nice if you would include a link or two to some source material to back up such a claim, rather than forcing us to take the word of
some crazed animal loving vegan...

Two, I'd be the first to cut meat (which I LOVE) if it would add 10 years to the middle of my life. But instead it will add 10 years to the
end of it when EVERYTHING is sooo much more difficult (such as urinating with or without wearing a Depends), and getting around is such a
chore... So no thanks, just pass me a nice Rib Eye medium rare, or a big ol' Burger topped with Bacon and Cheese!

Can you honestly tell me that you could survive in the wild on a vegetarian diet? For years, that is. Because I highly doubt there is one
geographical region that grows every plant you would need to receive the proper nutrients for survival. Have you ever watched....survival man?

You can go ahead and eat your phytoestrogens, I for one want to stay manly and keep my male characteristics and keep any estogenic compounds out of
my system as much as I can because soy products are everywhere and they aren't the only plants that contain artificial "estrogens". My body
aromatizes my male hormones enough to keep a proper balance and to allow me to maintain my health and my male characteristics. I have had hpta
disruptions and trust me, you don't want them and If you care about your manhood you would try to avoid them too. I would also like to tell you that
I have a family member that was born with hypogonadism and his endocrinologist specifically told him to stay away from soy products and products
containing soy. Point being, You need meat. Period. Face the facts. You may be against the killing of animals or whatever but human beings do have
specialized teeth for tearing meat. To me that is no coincidence.

Can you honestly tell me that you could survive in the wild on a vegetarian diet? For years, that is. Because I highly doubt there is one
geographical region that grows every plant you would need to receive the proper nutrients for survival. Have you ever watched....survival man?

Better yet, have you ever tried wild fruit, like an apple?

I am not living in the wild. I am living in what i thought was a civilised society where we seek to better ourselves and live in harmony with the
enviornment and the other denizens that inhabit this planet. To gain knowledge and to use that knowledge to promote harmony or balance. But as I said
I thought i was......

I never said fat and protein is what cause clogged arteries, I don't know what made you think that. Too much bad cholesterol will build up like
plaque** does to teeth.

Plaque buildup begins in your early years, usually because of a diet high in fat and low in fruits and vegetables. If you regularly eat fatty foods,
such as hamburgers loaded with mayonnaise, you are putting yourself at risk of cholesterol buildup. Other habits and high risk indicators, such as
smoking, drinking to excess, not enough physical exercise, becoming obese around your abdomen (the "spare tire"), developing diabetes, high stress,
untreated high blood pressure and blood cholesterol, are other causes that contribute to coronary disease. See link in Resources.

Originally posted by Ong Bak
so i read an article the other day taht cited some study with thousands of men and women conducted over a period of like 25 years that showed a direct
relationship between meat consumption and increased mortality rates/shorter life spans.
im not here to argue the validty of said study, im jsut wondering if the amount of people int he study, it think it was liek 50k people and the length
of the study (25 years) is long enough to prove once and for all that what many well educated peopel have known for alogn time, that meat will kill
you slowly, its legit?
or will meat eaters continue to deny the obvious fact that its poisoning their bodies becasue they jsut like to eat dead animals?

So tell that to my late 90 somthing Year old Grandmother(s) and 80's Grandpa' Grandma slurped up all meat and would even eat the fat off my country
ham I did not want and lived to be 93

I never said fat and protein is what cause clogged arteries, I don't know what made you think that. Too much bad cholesterol will build up like
plaque** does to teeth.

You're not allowed to quote eHow articles to prove a point. Sorry, not in here.

You said:

Thirdly, it is a bad idea to consume lots of meat if you don't get much exercise. That will lead to your arteries getting clogged and increase
your chances to a heart attack.

So...you certainly did say that animal meat, which is fat and protein, causes heart disease.

Eating fat and cholesterol is NOTHING like pouring grease down a sink. It doesn't "clog" the arteries. What you're not understanding
is...dietary saturated fat and cholesterol do not contribute to atherosclerosis. And, total cholesterol has never been a good predictor of heart
disease and myocardial infarction (heart attack).

People who eat two or more servings of red meat a day are much more likely to develop conditions leading to heart disease and diabetes, U.S.
researchers have found.

They found eating lots of red meat increased a person's risk of suffering from a cluster of risk factors known as metabolic syndrome by 25 per cent
compared to those who had only two servings of meat a week, the researchers reported in the journal Circulation.

The symptoms of metabolic syndrome include excessive fat around the waist, high cholesterol, high blood sugar and high blood pressure.

The study also found that diet soda consumption was linked to these elevated risk factors for heart disease and diabetes, echoing the findings of a
study published in July.

I think that we came to the conclusion of moderation when it comes to meat consumption. Two meals of red meat a day is way excessive in my opinion.
Maybe 2 meals of red meat a week would suffice. You could also add poultry and fish into other meals aside from the red meats. Just my .02
Damn I can't stay away from this thread. '

The human body was not designed to take supplements. I don't see them growing in the wild, do you?.
I take a very natural approach to my diet. If I can't what plant animal or mineral it cam from by looking at it I don't touch it. I don't eat foods
with chemicals or processed food. I frequent a health food store and it amazes me what they pass off as food for vegans, all I see is a bunch of
chemicals. Of course to be honest I am not 100% true to my diet as I have a weakness candy which I have watch closely but that is besides the
point.
I struggle with iron deficiency as it is, despite eating lots of raw nuts beans and such, if I cut meat out of my diet it would be even worse. Have
you ever suffered from pica? Its not pretty.

Ummm, nope. If you would like to grab a study that would be nice. Health journalists aren't really that well versed.

But I'll entertain your article...

First of all, people who eat 2 or more servings a day of red meat are also more likely to smoke, drink and consume starchy carbs with there
hamburgers. So, most studies like the one you've referenced don't take into consideration that we're dealing with multiple confounding factors.

Steffen's team examined the diets of 9,514 people in a study funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. In a departure from
related studies, this one went into a detailed look at precisely what people were eating. Most were aged 45 to 64.

Based on a 66-item food frequency questionnaire, the volunteers were categorized into two groups: those with a "western-pattern" diet, heavy on
processed meat, fried foods, red meat; and a "prudent-pattern" diet with more fruit and vegetables, with small amounts of fish and
poultry.

See....nothing more than a few questionnaires. And people don't typically report their dietary habits truthfully, anyway.

Here's a perfect example...diet drinks, as far as we know, don't cause metabolic syndrome. And yet, diet soda consumption was strongly correlated
with insulin resistance, diabetes and obesity. It's extremely unlikely that diet sodas caused these diseases. What's more likely is that people
who consume diet sodas used to drink regular sugar-rich sodas....which caused the problems. And now they're on diet sodas because they're on a
diet.

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.